Telephoto lens - Stabilised or not?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree, great shots.
Are you saying these were taken at 1/64th of a second ?!
If so is that what the camera came up with - type would be intersting - or as you infer, manual exposure ?
I've worked alongside the press photographers too - everything one sees in films is true, they're utter Piranhas.
I found I got the best results by stepping away a few ( or a few hundred ) yards for a clear shot while they were busy jostling and climbing over each other !
DZ
Are you saying these were taken at 1/64th of a second ?!
If so is that what the camera came up with - type would be intersting - or as you infer, manual exposure ?
I've worked alongside the press photographers too - everything one sees in films is true, they're utter Piranhas.
I found I got the best results by stepping away a few ( or a few hundred ) yards for a clear shot while they were busy jostling and climbing over each other !
DZ
TA for the comments.
'00'
They're not shot pure 'manual', though like yourself I was pre-digital, starting out with Zenith and then moving onto pure manual Pentax MXs' (5FPS motordrive
) and then Pro spec Canon Eos1nHS and Eos3. I do occaisionally use pure manual reversion. I can still remember, sunny day, Kodachrome 64, 125th sec, for good overall exposure
The data for the shots are as follows 1DMKII + 400 f2.8
C130
ISO250 F29 1/60sec
Cricket
ISO160 F4.5 1/2000sec
Neddy
ISO160 F5.6 1/800
I use Shutter Priority as a main setting when doing these types of shots and rarely go above ISO250 due 'noise'. Most shots of mine are taken ISO160 or below. I work on rule of thumb basics of blur/pan = slow shutter, freeze action = fast shutter. Whilst dialling them up through the viewfinder I watch for the aperature too bearing in mind my required depth of field simultaneously.
For the C130 I wanted sharp aircraft/prop discs showing no blade, and a 'smeared' background, so I had to be well below 125th sec for the background/discs. I take in mind the speed the subjects are moving at too so a herc is relatively speaking 'slow'.
For the cricket I wanted frozen ball, bales in the air, so needed fast shutter but about 6-10ft DOF to capture player well too.
Neddy, again freeze action but as horse is moving forward, enough DOF to get horse and riders face in focus. Speed not so important as cricket as subject is moving slowly(relatively).
Working with Newshounds gave me some briliant experiences/opportunities, wouldn't have missed it for anything.
'00'
They're not shot pure 'manual', though like yourself I was pre-digital, starting out with Zenith and then moving onto pure manual Pentax MXs' (5FPS motordrive
) and then Pro spec Canon Eos1nHS and Eos3. I do occaisionally use pure manual reversion. I can still remember, sunny day, Kodachrome 64, 125th sec, for good overall exposureThe data for the shots are as follows 1DMKII + 400 f2.8
C130
ISO250 F29 1/60sec
Cricket
ISO160 F4.5 1/2000sec
Neddy
ISO160 F5.6 1/800
I use Shutter Priority as a main setting when doing these types of shots and rarely go above ISO250 due 'noise'. Most shots of mine are taken ISO160 or below. I work on rule of thumb basics of blur/pan = slow shutter, freeze action = fast shutter. Whilst dialling them up through the viewfinder I watch for the aperature too bearing in mind my required depth of field simultaneously.
For the C130 I wanted sharp aircraft/prop discs showing no blade, and a 'smeared' background, so I had to be well below 125th sec for the background/discs. I take in mind the speed the subjects are moving at too so a herc is relatively speaking 'slow'.
For the cricket I wanted frozen ball, bales in the air, so needed fast shutter but about 6-10ft DOF to capture player well too.
Neddy, again freeze action but as horse is moving forward, enough DOF to get horse and riders face in focus. Speed not so important as cricket as subject is moving slowly(relatively).
Working with Newshounds gave me some briliant experiences/opportunities, wouldn't have missed it for anything.
Jumpseater,
Cracking shot of the C-130 at such a low shutter speed! You should give the shoulder mount a try out. They take a little while to get used to, but with the front hand grip you can really get the stock tight into the shoulder.
TJ
Cracking shot of the C-130 at such a low shutter speed! You should give the shoulder mount a try out. They take a little while to get used to, but with the front hand grip you can really get the stock tight into the shoulder.
TJ
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jumpseater,
If not so already ( ? ) you could EASILY make professional !
Problem is nowadays, every Tom Dick ( especially Dicks ) & Harry thinks they're a pro', and as cameras advance the margin narrows...
As for the shoulder mounted grip Teej advises, maybe a great thing for pure photography, but as someone else pointed out, in this day & age one can get held down & 7 bullets in the head just for jumping a ticket barrier, so god knows what you'd get for holding what could easily be mistaken for a 'Stinger' or similar by an airfield !
There was a notorious incident a few years ago when an ' activist ' ( terrorists weren't trendy then ) had his car riddled with bullets in central London, somehow he survived.
'Private Eye' ran a brilliant front page of two guys in balaclava's etc, " how come you shot him 27 times ? " - " I ran out of bullets ! "
I do know, as I live about 10 miles away from Gatwick, that police regularly check the little roadside parking places under the flightpath.
I'm glad that's a recent thing, as these are precisely the places one when young with first car would go with one's girlfriend for a 'snuggle' !!!
If not so already ( ? ) you could EASILY make professional !
Problem is nowadays, every Tom Dick ( especially Dicks ) & Harry thinks they're a pro', and as cameras advance the margin narrows...
As for the shoulder mounted grip Teej advises, maybe a great thing for pure photography, but as someone else pointed out, in this day & age one can get held down & 7 bullets in the head just for jumping a ticket barrier, so god knows what you'd get for holding what could easily be mistaken for a 'Stinger' or similar by an airfield !
There was a notorious incident a few years ago when an ' activist ' ( terrorists weren't trendy then ) had his car riddled with bullets in central London, somehow he survived.
'Private Eye' ran a brilliant front page of two guys in balaclava's etc, " how come you shot him 27 times ? " - " I ran out of bullets ! "
I do know, as I live about 10 miles away from Gatwick, that police regularly check the little roadside parking places under the flightpath.
I'm glad that's a recent thing, as these are precisely the places one when young with first car would go with one's girlfriend for a 'snuggle' !!!
I agree Double Zero. As stated before I have seen enthusiasts using them around the periphery of airfields in the UK. Once you fit a 300mm plus lens to the camera you can see how they can be mistaken for a weapons system. I would advise any snapper who has them to not use them in such situations.
US military photographers are keen users of them on ops.
TJ
US military photographers are keen users of them on ops.
TJ
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Teej;
I hope there's some way of alerting ATC & security ( allo, intelligince speaking ) Copyright Spike Milligan )...
Hopefully the Pprune moderators will pick it up and pass it on.
Happy shooting,
DZ
I hope there's some way of alerting ATC & security ( allo, intelligince speaking ) Copyright Spike Milligan )...
Hopefully the Pprune moderators will pick it up and pass it on.
Happy shooting,
DZ
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I traded in my bag of Olympus junk last year and picked up a Nikon D700 with a Sigma 120-400 4.5-5.6 lens.
I have found over the years that shooting aperture priority at F8 is your best bet for a sharp picture.
The beauty of the D700 is that increased iso does not mean increased noise so when you need the extra speed, just increase the iso - even 800 plus still gives excellent results.
The Sigma lens is just as good as the canon or nikon offerings, and at least half the price.
The main thing to remember is to shoot at at least F8 if you can, it's the lenses sweet spot and will give you the best results .
Shooting wide open will not unless you pay 4k or over for a superfast lens.
And IS rocks , in any situation !
I have found over the years that shooting aperture priority at F8 is your best bet for a sharp picture.
The beauty of the D700 is that increased iso does not mean increased noise so when you need the extra speed, just increase the iso - even 800 plus still gives excellent results.
The Sigma lens is just as good as the canon or nikon offerings, and at least half the price.
The main thing to remember is to shoot at at least F8 if you can, it's the lenses sweet spot and will give you the best results .
Shooting wide open will not unless you pay 4k or over for a superfast lens.
And IS rocks , in any situation !
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 1,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the bad old days, when shots like that above were simply impossible, there was a simple rule for air-air shots.
Hasselblad 500CM, NC90 viewfinder, Kodak VPS negative film slightly pushed from 125 to 200 ASA ( it didn't mind at all ) and if in bright conditions or above cloud, it was rare to vary from F8 at 500th; the angle of dangle and focus ( yes, getting below infinity was common ), and things like pointing the thing were foremost.
This is assuming - A word I hate ! - that one has already sorted out the met' forecast, cloud layer re. the altitude you and subject aircraft will both be happy with, and direction of sunlight re. time of day ( always allowing for inevitable delays of one kind or another ).
The time of day thing is usually ( restrictions etc ) more important for air to ground shots, as I've found houses even less happy to go around and take up a suitable heading than some aircraft I've known !
I would have liked to use transparency film but BAe Kingston couldn't handle it ( or quite possibly they didn't want me from Dunsfold getting good results, there was a lot going on behind the scenes, resulting in one head of dept' there being politely shown the door ).
I notice John Dibbs' excellent work is / was on transparency, besides the ' luxury ' of his own converted B-25 camera platform - don't know if he still has it, I'd have thought operating costs must be horrendous - though if money were no object it sounds terrific fun, and I'm aware he uses other more economical aircraft too.
I've always wondered what camera kit he uses, I've been in a position - a while ago now, 1994-ish - to see he was using transparency film at that time.
Hasselblad 500CM, NC90 viewfinder, Kodak VPS negative film slightly pushed from 125 to 200 ASA ( it didn't mind at all ) and if in bright conditions or above cloud, it was rare to vary from F8 at 500th; the angle of dangle and focus ( yes, getting below infinity was common ), and things like pointing the thing were foremost.
This is assuming - A word I hate ! - that one has already sorted out the met' forecast, cloud layer re. the altitude you and subject aircraft will both be happy with, and direction of sunlight re. time of day ( always allowing for inevitable delays of one kind or another ).
The time of day thing is usually ( restrictions etc ) more important for air to ground shots, as I've found houses even less happy to go around and take up a suitable heading than some aircraft I've known !
I would have liked to use transparency film but BAe Kingston couldn't handle it ( or quite possibly they didn't want me from Dunsfold getting good results, there was a lot going on behind the scenes, resulting in one head of dept' there being politely shown the door ).
I notice John Dibbs' excellent work is / was on transparency, besides the ' luxury ' of his own converted B-25 camera platform - don't know if he still has it, I'd have thought operating costs must be horrendous - though if money were no object it sounds terrific fun, and I'm aware he uses other more economical aircraft too.
I've always wondered what camera kit he uses, I've been in a position - a while ago now, 1994-ish - to see he was using transparency film at that time.
Last edited by Double Zero; 20th Apr 2010 at 13:57.
Hippopotomonstrosesquipidelian title
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: is everything
Posts: 1,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nikon VR has "normal" and "active" modes. The latter is more suited to panning because it extends the low-frequency correction range. But looking at the frequency response graphs of the two modes, it's clear YMMV in the real world.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North West
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: disparging remarks on various brands 'glass'
I think you'll find all the top brands have good 'glass', but the thing about olympus and their 4/3rds system is that all their lenses are pretty much 'above average'! Whereas other brands have different lenses with different optical performance, with Olympus, it is system-wide.
The problem with 4/3rds though is their relatively small sensors bring with them noisy high ISOs. But if you don't need high ISOs, it's a system with some compelling advantages.
Regards cameras looking like weapons and getting their owners into trouble: ask these men:
Collateral Murder
or
BBC News - US 'reviewing' Iraq killing video posted on WikiLeaks
Mis-identification helped get these men killed. :-(
p.s I'd have thought Olympus, and their 4/3rds system, would have gained a lot of users in the 'spotting' comunity due to the 2x multiplication factor the system gives any lenses fitted. i.e their 50-200mm/f2.8-3.5 lens acts like a 100-400mm lens! That is a decent telephoto zoom range in a small, relatively inexpensive package!
The problem with 4/3rds though is their relatively small sensors bring with them noisy high ISOs. But if you don't need high ISOs, it's a system with some compelling advantages.
Regards cameras looking like weapons and getting their owners into trouble: ask these men:
Collateral Murder
or
BBC News - US 'reviewing' Iraq killing video posted on WikiLeaks
Mis-identification helped get these men killed. :-(
p.s I'd have thought Olympus, and their 4/3rds system, would have gained a lot of users in the 'spotting' comunity due to the 2x multiplication factor the system gives any lenses fitted. i.e their 50-200mm/f2.8-3.5 lens acts like a 100-400mm lens! That is a decent telephoto zoom range in a small, relatively inexpensive package!
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I use an Olympus E30 with a 50-200 for motor sport it works wellif I use the right settings for IS metering and focussing . The E30 focuses quickly and will hold focus when panninig a bike through a corner . IS is aslso good if only set in the vertical plane .
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My sigma 120-400 has 3 settings for IS -full, panning and off.
Off is reccomended for tripod use, full for handheld and panning speaks for itself.
I used to have an olympus E3 with 50 -200 f2.8.
It could not cope with aircraft very well and the autofocus hunted like a sonofabitch, and as for low ISO noise!
It was like a big 'join the dots' puzzle.
Choose your camera wisely as it expensive to change your system.
If the camera you need costs a little more, then save some more for it.
Off is reccomended for tripod use, full for handheld and panning speaks for itself.
I used to have an olympus E3 with 50 -200 f2.8.
It could not cope with aircraft very well and the autofocus hunted like a sonofabitch, and as for low ISO noise!
It was like a big 'join the dots' puzzle.
Choose your camera wisely as it expensive to change your system.
If the camera you need costs a little more, then save some more for it.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North West
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MSF: "I used to have an olympus E3 with 50 -200 f2.8.
It could not cope with aircraft very well and the autofocus hunted like a sonofabitch, and as for low ISO noise!
It was like a big 'join the dots' puzzle."
Yeah, maybe... I supose the smart money nowadays goes down on a nikon D300!! (or the D400 when it appears)
I was just thinking though after I wrote that post, that someone on a tight budget could do a lot worse than getting one of the entry level 4/3rds bodies and the 70-300/f4-5.6 lens. Then he has a daylight setup that'll do 600mm @ f5.6. Look how much other brands have to pay to get 600mm!
I'll get off my [non-paid] sales pitch now! ;-)
It could not cope with aircraft very well and the autofocus hunted like a sonofabitch, and as for low ISO noise!
It was like a big 'join the dots' puzzle."
Yeah, maybe... I supose the smart money nowadays goes down on a nikon D300!! (or the D400 when it appears)
I was just thinking though after I wrote that post, that someone on a tight budget could do a lot worse than getting one of the entry level 4/3rds bodies and the 70-300/f4-5.6 lens. Then he has a daylight setup that'll do 600mm @ f5.6. Look how much other brands have to pay to get 600mm!
I'll get off my [non-paid] sales pitch now! ;-)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I too was a a staunch Olympus fan - until the E3 (E1,E300,E410,E500 and I still have a bag full of om1's,2's, and a 3 with all zuiko glass).
The new gear failed to live up to what you should expect for over a grand Sterling , hence Choose your camera wisely as it expensive to change your system.
If the camera you need costs a little more, then save some more for it.
Aircraft photography needs a little more high spec equipment than motor racing.
350 plus mph at airshows with poor contrast between a grey aircraft and a grey sky shows the limit of a poor a/f system really fast - as I found out.
The new camera exceedes all expectations and with the new 400x compact flash cards the old full buffer problem is now a thing of the past.
In a world where true progress is rarely seen, at least photographic equipment is improving.
The new gear failed to live up to what you should expect for over a grand Sterling , hence Choose your camera wisely as it expensive to change your system.
If the camera you need costs a little more, then save some more for it.
Aircraft photography needs a little more high spec equipment than motor racing.
350 plus mph at airshows with poor contrast between a grey aircraft and a grey sky shows the limit of a poor a/f system really fast - as I found out.
The new camera exceedes all expectations and with the new 400x compact flash cards the old full buffer problem is now a thing of the past.
In a world where true progress is rarely seen, at least photographic equipment is improving.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Cork, Ireland
Posts: 1,625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the autofocus better in the high end lenses? My best results so far over the past few weeks have been by manual focus. The winter photos were all autofocus and they were all a fair bit out and were probably a good source of my earlier chagrin.
Is there any kind 'SOP' that I can call out to myself to prepare for a shot? A few days ago I had the White Balance in the shade mode and some nice shots were messed up. I was in a foul mood going to work later in the day! I dont yet have any filters - what ones are absolutely necessary?
Excluding panning shots and airborne shots does Image Stabilisation work in both axes, like for stationary subjects?
Lastly, (sorry!) can you download your jpegs to a mp3 player/ipod that has a screen and can you do the same thing after the images have been cropped? Mp3 players and ipods are slightly ahead of my time and I have only found what they are in the last few weeks.
Looks like it will be the f4 - dont yet know about the IS. Can do a a hell of a lot with that extra four hundred spondulics! A lens that would be worth more than my car!
Janey Mac!
Thanks.
Is there any kind 'SOP' that I can call out to myself to prepare for a shot? A few days ago I had the White Balance in the shade mode and some nice shots were messed up. I was in a foul mood going to work later in the day! I dont yet have any filters - what ones are absolutely necessary?
Excluding panning shots and airborne shots does Image Stabilisation work in both axes, like for stationary subjects?
Lastly, (sorry!) can you download your jpegs to a mp3 player/ipod that has a screen and can you do the same thing after the images have been cropped? Mp3 players and ipods are slightly ahead of my time and I have only found what they are in the last few weeks.
Looks like it will be the f4 - dont yet know about the IS. Can do a a hell of a lot with that extra four hundred spondulics! A lens that would be worth more than my car!
Janey Mac!
Thanks.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North West
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MSF, so what did you go for next? (excuse if it is earlier in the thread) And why?
I must say that I seldom do photography now.. it was almost as if I waited for the E-3 and when I got it, I lost the passion. So mine has moderately little use.
So I'm still learning the E-3 and am a bit perturbed by finding how noisy the E-3 is... any dark areas in the frame that are under exposed... well lets just say I'm not that impressed. [I'll play with the Noise Filter settings and see what they do]
But Olympus gear had compelling points, fully sealed bodies at far less £ than 'canikons', the tidy range of lenses all of them pretty good, the dust shaker, pixel mapping, automatic image correcting (vignetting, distortion, etc), etc. All of these where incorporated inside 4/33rds from the off.
I liked that about Olympus gear. But those small sensors... :-(
I must say that I seldom do photography now.. it was almost as if I waited for the E-3 and when I got it, I lost the passion. So mine has moderately little use.
So I'm still learning the E-3 and am a bit perturbed by finding how noisy the E-3 is... any dark areas in the frame that are under exposed... well lets just say I'm not that impressed. [I'll play with the Noise Filter settings and see what they do]
But Olympus gear had compelling points, fully sealed bodies at far less £ than 'canikons', the tidy range of lenses all of them pretty good, the dust shaker, pixel mapping, automatic image correcting (vignetting, distortion, etc), etc. All of these where incorporated inside 4/33rds from the off.
I liked that about Olympus gear. But those small sensors... :-(
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw the E1 and loved it.
It was easily the best dig slr at the time.
I used it for a couple of years but it was showing its limitations.
When the E3 was released, I was not impressed by its spec, but the olympus die hards on the 4/3rds forum convinced me that it was a lot better than it actually was.
I shot 3 airshows and out of over 8000 shots ,I had to reject over 6000 due to poor autofocus and appalling noise - even at ISO200.
Even the static shots were bad!.
I decided to go to london last October , when the E3 was still hot property , and traded 3 bodies , a 50-200 F2.8, 11-22 2.8, 14-54 2.8 as well as 2 converters, 2 power grips and a flash gun for a Nikon D700 and a Sigma 120-400 f4-5.6 +£300 and am glad that I did.
Just like you , the E3 killed it for me,but the D700 got it back.
The D700 is £600 more expensive than the 300 but in the kind of light that we get in Ireland , I can shoot all day at ISO 800 with no almost noise and the loss of crop factor is not a problem as the full frame sensor allows greater scope for selective enlargements with none of the penalties of the smaller sensors.
I can understand the arguement for going for the most affordable body with the best lens you can afford, but that was for FILM cameras.
The sensor is now usually the weakest link, where as before, a cheap PK mount body with a good pentax lens and Kodak of Fuji film could get you some excellent shots, not any more.
Tom, the best bet is to shoot in RAW mode.
You can change the white balance and a host of other settings at your leisure.
It can litteraly mean the difference between a wasted days shooting and a learning experience with good shots to show as well.
It was easily the best dig slr at the time.
I used it for a couple of years but it was showing its limitations.
When the E3 was released, I was not impressed by its spec, but the olympus die hards on the 4/3rds forum convinced me that it was a lot better than it actually was.
I shot 3 airshows and out of over 8000 shots ,I had to reject over 6000 due to poor autofocus and appalling noise - even at ISO200.
Even the static shots were bad!.
I decided to go to london last October , when the E3 was still hot property , and traded 3 bodies , a 50-200 F2.8, 11-22 2.8, 14-54 2.8 as well as 2 converters, 2 power grips and a flash gun for a Nikon D700 and a Sigma 120-400 f4-5.6 +£300 and am glad that I did.
Just like you , the E3 killed it for me,but the D700 got it back.
The D700 is £600 more expensive than the 300 but in the kind of light that we get in Ireland , I can shoot all day at ISO 800 with no almost noise and the loss of crop factor is not a problem as the full frame sensor allows greater scope for selective enlargements with none of the penalties of the smaller sensors.
I can understand the arguement for going for the most affordable body with the best lens you can afford, but that was for FILM cameras.
The sensor is now usually the weakest link, where as before, a cheap PK mount body with a good pentax lens and Kodak of Fuji film could get you some excellent shots, not any more.
Tom, the best bet is to shoot in RAW mode.
You can change the white balance and a host of other settings at your leisure.
It can litteraly mean the difference between a wasted days shooting and a learning experience with good shots to show as well.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North West
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hiya MSF... sounds like you went to full frame heaven? :-)
I went on Holiday with the E-3 with that was my only camera... I felt a doofus walking round with a bloody big black thing over my shoulder when everyone else had a silver thing that fitted in a shirt pocket or the unbiqitous phone cam.
I think if I was buying a family or day-to-day camera now, I'd give the micro 4/3rds line a look. I belive they are pretty sexy!
Anyway, I came home from Poland and realised I'd left the noise filter on 'off'. [I am used to this as I'd get rid of noise with editting later] So a fair amount of these images [of Aushwitz, etc] are totally ruined as in any dark areas, there is no detail to any grass or trees, it's just a mass of indistinct bits. And I wouldn't say these images were under-exposed much.
It is a shame about Olympus or 4/3rds.. if only that sensor was bigger or they reduced the MP number to make better high ISOs.
Cheers
I went on Holiday with the E-3 with that was my only camera... I felt a doofus walking round with a bloody big black thing over my shoulder when everyone else had a silver thing that fitted in a shirt pocket or the unbiqitous phone cam.
I think if I was buying a family or day-to-day camera now, I'd give the micro 4/3rds line a look. I belive they are pretty sexy!
Anyway, I came home from Poland and realised I'd left the noise filter on 'off'. [I am used to this as I'd get rid of noise with editting later] So a fair amount of these images [of Aushwitz, etc] are totally ruined as in any dark areas, there is no detail to any grass or trees, it's just a mass of indistinct bits. And I wouldn't say these images were under-exposed much.
It is a shame about Olympus or 4/3rds.. if only that sensor was bigger or they reduced the MP number to make better high ISOs.
Cheers